Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
A recent study published in Public Understanding of Science highlights how many nonreligious individuals stereotype Christians as less competent in science, driven by the belief that Christianity and science are fundamentally at odds. However, the research also revealed that presenting Christianity and science as compatible improves nonreligious people’s perceptions of Christians.
“There’s a widespread notion in Western societies that science and religion conflict. For instance, prominent atheists like Steven Pinker and Sam Harris opposed Francis Collins leading the National Institutes of Health (NIH) because of his Evangelical Christian faith,” explained study author Cameron Mackey (@CameronDMackey1), a doctoral candidate at Ohio University.
“Debates over teaching evolution versus Intelligent Design in schools have long underscored this perceived clash. We wanted to explore how this belief in a religion-science conflict affects how nonreligious individuals view religious people, specifically Christians, and whether it fuels stereotypes of Christians being scientifically incompetent.”
“Additionally, we aimed to see if reframing the relationship between Christianity and science—from conflict to compatibility—could shift nonreligious individuals’ stereotypes of Christians in a positive direction,” Mackey added.
To conduct their research, the team recruited 365 participants via Prolific, comprising 151 Christians and 214 nonreligious individuals. Participants were asked directly, “How incompatible versus compatible do you personally believe science and Christianity are?” Responses were measured on a seven-point scale.
Participants were then introduced to “Kevin,” a generic character described as intelligent, attending a prestigious university, and solving complex global problems. Christians were asked how likely Kevin was to have a PhD and whether he was a Christian or atheist.
Finally, participants rated various groups (atheists, agnostics, “spiritual but not religious” individuals, Christians, Jews, and Muslims) on traits like intelligence, scientific interest, competence, and scientific ability using a 0 to 100 scale.
The findings showed that Christian participants were more inclined to view Christianity and science as compatible, while nonreligious participants leaned towards perceiving them as incompatible.
Christians believed Kevin was more likely to have a PhD and be a Christian, whereas nonreligious participants thought Kevin was more likely to have a PhD and be an atheist. Similarly, Christians rated fellow Christians as more intelligent, while nonreligious participants attributed greater intelligence to atheists.
Moreover, Christians rated their own group as more scientific compared to nonreligious participants, who viewed atheists as more scientific.
The study also uncovered that beliefs about compatibility mediated the link between religious affiliation and perceptions of Christians’ intelligence and scientific ability. Nonreligious participants who saw Christianity and science as incompatible were more likely to view Christians as less intelligent and unscientific.
“Our research reveals that perceiving a conflict between religion and science not only affects Christians’ engagement with science but also influences how nonreligious people stereotype Christians,” Mackey told SG. “Nonreligious individuals who believe Christianity and science are incompatible tend to stereotype Christians as uninterested or incapable in scientific fields.”
To further investigate, the researchers conducted an experiment with 799 participants from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. This sample included 520 Christians and 279 nonreligious individuals, who were randomly assigned to read one of two articles. One article depicted Christianity and science as compatible, while the other emphasized their incompatibility.
Participants then completed the same implicit and explicit measures as in the initial study. The results showed that nonreligious individuals perceived Christians as more intelligent and scientific when exposed to information portraying Christianity and science as compatible compared to those who read about them being incompatible.
“The results indicate that highlighting ways Christianity and science can coexist positively shifts nonreligious people’s views of Christians in scientific contexts,” Mackey said. “This shift is important for boosting Christian representation in science and fostering trust between religious and nonreligious groups within scientific communities.”
Mackey elaborated, “Even a brief narrative showing how Christianity and science can coexist significantly improved nonreligious participants’ perceptions of Christians as scientific. For example, ratings for Christians’ scientific ability rose from 38.63 out of 100 among those who read about conflict to 53.35 among those who read about compatibility. This was surprising given the prevalence of negative stereotypes about Christians in science within American society.”
Nonetheless, the study has limitations.
“Our research was conducted in the U.S., where stereotypes about Christians being unscientific are particularly common. In other countries, different religions may be seen as incompatible with science—for instance, Islam in the UK,” Mackey noted. “Future studies could explore whether nonreligious individuals in the UK hold more positive stereotypes of Muslims in science after reading about how science and Islam can coexist.”
Mackey added that the study’s manipulation was direct. “We explicitly told participants that Christianity and science were either compatible or incompatible. Future research could test these effects using subtler methods, such as highlighting prominent Christian scientists like Francis Collins to shift perceptions.”
“Our findings also suggest that nonreligious individuals may be less likely to consider Christians suitable for scientific roles,” Mackey said. “It’s crucial to examine how scientists, especially in the U.S. where nonreligious individuals are overrepresented, evaluate Christian applicants for research positions or graduate programs. Understanding whether these biases can be mitigated through reframing religion-science compatibility could be valuable.”
The research has practical implications.
“Reminding people that Christianity and science can coexist reduces nonreligious individuals’ reliance on negative stereotypes about Christians in science,” Mackey explained. “This shift could help increase Christian representation in science, ensuring a broader pool of talent. Since nonreligious individuals dominate scientific fields, they may unintentionally ‘gatekeep’ science from Christians due to perceived incompatibility.”
“Reducing polarization between religious and nonreligious groups over science is another potential benefit. This is particularly critical given Evangelical Christians’ skepticism toward science, such as vaccine hesitancy during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Mackey continued. “Encouraging dialogue between scientists and religious individuals can foster mutual understanding and trust.”
The study, “Christianity-science compatibility beliefs increase nonreligious individuals’ perceptions of Christians’ intelligence and scientific ability,” was authored by Cameron D. Mackey, Kimberly Rios, and Zhen Hadassah Cheng.
